State ex rel. Bowling v. DeWine

Summary

The dissent agrees that the mandamus claim became moot after statutory amendment eliminated the director's duty to secure optional federal benefits, but concludes that declaratory-judgment and permanent-injunction claims remained justiciable because federal benefits might still be recoverable. It would hold that former R.C. 4141.43(I) required the ODJFS director to maintain Ohio's participation in the pandemic unemployment program, while imposing no comparable duty directly on the governor. The dissent would therefore dismiss the mandamus claim, affirm relief against the director, and grant the governor summary judgment.